|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Luke and Matthews geneologies | |||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
Howdy judge,
You've probably noticed that a similar topic has had my attention of late, but you take a different tack, so lets see what we can do.
quote: okey dokey
quote: OK. That is the significant chunk.
quote: Tell me about it
quote: There seems to be some debate as to what language Matthew actually wrote. Interesting but not a critical point, as I see it. Let's go with the Hebrew, as you propose.
quote: The very first translation of Matthew from Aramaic which I stumbled across reads virtually identical to the more common translations.
V-a.com Matt. 1:16 To Jacob Joseph, husband of Mary, the Mary to whom was born Jesus, who is called the Anointed One.
quote: So the idea is that Matthew was written in Hebrew and that work was translated into Greek and into Aramaic. The Greek has an error, the Aramaic does not. hmmm... we do not have the Hebrew original, so how do we know which is more accurate? Translator error, eh? So much for God preserving his divinely inspired work. Just a note. I know you haven't brought this issue up. Thirdly, the translation from Aramaic which I found contradicts you. Even then, you haven't really addressed that the genealogies of Matthew and Luke are radically different. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com [This message has been edited by John, 11-16-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Ok. I missed that part.
[quote][b]The proof of this is , as I showed, gowra is used to describe a [i]father[i/] in Matthew 7:9 for example.[/b][/quote] This is interesting but I don't see that it is proof.
quote: I don't see that he would have to translate the same word the same way every time. Sometimes languages don't work that way. Of course, this is largely semantic because my Aramaic is nil.
quote: This is the position Funkie took and he didn't do a good job defending it. I can't say that I understand your line of reasoning well enough yet to make much of a comment. Lets see. Matthew 1:16. This is the verse where the word 'gowra' is used. You believe this verse should read "And Jacob begat Joseph the FATHER of Mary..... " Yes? Interesting. It does solve the problem neatly. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Why would writing for a gentile audience involve showing that Jesus was a son of Adam-- a Jewish myth? And why does the lineage from David not show the same thing?
quote: Jews kept pretty good records of lineage as I understand it. I'd bet the information was available, or would have been had the works been written in Christ's lifetime rather than decades later.
quote: I'd bet you are right, but this also blows the divine inspiration theory.
quote: Agreed.
quote: Again, agreed.
quote: And again... we agree. ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I saw this post and meant to spend some time on it, but forgot Below is a list taken directly from the site mentioned. I have left out the chapters and verses except where directly relevant to my comments. First off, the proof for nearly every fulfilled prophecy is the NT, at least as this cite has it listed. The problem with this ought to be obvious. The NT was written ~60-150 years after the death of Christ by people well aware of the OT prophecies and perfectly capable of writing the NT so that Jesus fits the bill. And, no, I don't have to prove that this actually is what happened. As long as it is option, the book cannot be proof of itself. Secondly, some of the proofs for the fulfillment of OT prophecies are more prophecies in the NT. This is too nuts for words. How can one unfullfilled prophecy be proven by yet another (as yet, to be kind) unfullfilled prophecy?
quote: A bit of a no-brainer really. We all fulfill this one.
quote: Not a tough thing really, since the myth has Abraham to be the ancestor to all of the Isrealites, or damn close. Basically, this one says "he has to be a Jew"
quote: Matthew 1:1-2 >> Abram > Isaac > Jacob > Judas > Phares > Esrom Luke 3:33 >> Abraham > Isaac > Jacob > Juda > Phares > Esrom Good so far...
quote: Notice the genealogy above. Being from the Tribe of Judah, he is by default the seed of Jacob. Basically it is a slightly more general phophecy than the one preceeding it.
quote: To make this work you have to violate jewish genealogical rules. Since most of the rest of the thread is about this specifically. I am going to skip it here.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://Torah.freeyellow.com/page35.html quote: This is a weird one. How does one tell if this has been fulfilled or not? Like Moses? Much of what Jesus taught flies in the face of Moses' teachings.
quote: Another weird one. We have only the word of a couple of people whe were not even born at the time of the event. And it is virtually impossible to reconcile with Christ being the seed of David. Jews didn't trace genealogy via females so it wasn't through Mary that he got this precious seed of David.
quote: Nice story. One of about a hundred resurrection myths. There is no evidence that it actually happened so calling it fulfilled is just silly.
quote: The two psalms cited describe the cruxifiction of the NT quite well. I'd say the NT was written to fit this prophecy. Is there any evidnce outside of the NT? Nope.
quote: Well, we all fit this one.
quote: This is another one of those typical-of-every-religion prophecies. But that aside, the only evidence that this happened is the book making the claim.
quote: The only evidence that this happened is the book making the claim.
quote: I don't recal that Christ was a priest at all. The verses in Hebrews is odd to me. Don't you think this priesthood would have been mentioned in the Gospels?
quote: This is a fulfilled prophecy? How does one know?
quote: Far too cryptic and ethereal to have meaning as a fulfilled prophecy.
quote: Verification anyone? Even the NT itself seems to be a bit schizophrenic about this one. Is. 7:14 translates the Hebrew 'almah' as virgin. 'Almah' more correctly means young woman. And the verse in Isaiah is referring to a person living the time of the prophecy, not in the time of christ. So it seems to me. The virgin birth was to be God's way of taking the heat off of Ahaz. Oh, and the verse says the virgin born child will be called Immanuel. Jesus is not called Immanuel in the NT, not once. So this ain't him anyway.
quote: Not a hard prophecy to fulfill. Jesus, hopefully would have bee fright enough to get this part right. The prophecy in Isaiah is written in past tense. Prophecies are usually in the future, yes?
quote: We all know Christ had a temper, and those money changers got a good taste of it.
quote: Again, not a hard thing to pull off.
quote: It is remarkable easy to get yourself executed. Just piss off the church, as Christ found out.
quote: The only proof is the book that makes the claim. Silly. Besides the resurrection stories don't track exactly anyway.
quote: And we are to know that this is an EVERLASTING covenant, how? This cannot be considered fulfilled until the end of time, when we can look back and see if it was everlasting or not.
quote: I'd like to know how this is supposed to be a fulfilled prophecy?
quote: Verification? We have some guy saying so. Oops, sorry. We have some guys who never met Jesus saying that he said so.
quote: Miracles are a dime a dozen in mythology. Why is this myth to be taken literally while the others are not?
quote: Another silly sort of prophecy. I guess this make up for not being called Immanuel?
quote: I want someone to try to explain this one to me.
quote: The verse in Micah refers to a clan not a place and the prophecy refers to a military leader, which christ was not.
quote: So Christ threw a fit and this qualifies him? Hardly a difficult thing to pull off.
quote: Matthew has Jesus sitting on an ass and a colt (Matt. 21:5) Mark and Luke have him riding a colt only (Mark 11:7 and Luke 19:35) While John opts for only the ass (John 12:14) You call this fulfilled?
quote: And to think my mom had a fit when I pierced my ears. Zacheriah 12;10 hardly seems like aprophecy anyway. God is talking in the past tense.
quote: Zach 13:7 God is threatening livestock and children? Smite the shephered and the sheep shall be scattered? Not a terribly striking statement for a tribe of nomadic pastorialists. Its just common sense.
quote: Where is the verification?
quote: Death seems to be getting along just fine.
quote: Right. Christ the King. Are they serious? Was not a King.
quote: This is at best, not yet fulfilled. What then is it doing among the supposedly fulfilled prophecies?
quote: The gentiles seek Baba Ram Dass and L. Ron Hubbard as well. What is this supposed to prove? ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Chara, You posted a link to a list of messianic prophecies and implied, at least, that you agreed that these prophecies had been fulfilled. Then bumped the post. So I responded to the only thing of substance-- the list of prophecies. You are right, it is mostly off topic, but not entirely. And I couldn't let such a list get away scott free. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: No offense intended.
quote: It seems that pointing out that Christ did not fulfill the messianic prophecies or that the prophecies were too fuzzy to have any real meaning seems directly relevant.
quote: I missed that it was a question. oops... Math of probabilities? You mean, since so many prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus the chances are good that he is the one? 1) There aren't many, if any, unambiguous and verifiable prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ. 2) I don't think it works that way. Being the messiah, he'd have to fulfill all of them, not just some or most. Otherwise, you'd never be sure. It isn't a case of best qualified. It is qualified or not-qualified. The genealogies are pretty clear and unambiguous, unless you want them to mean that Christ is the messiah. For the later, you need much mojo. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
quote: No offense to Chara, but I am not exactly sure what the question means. Namely, how does the math of probability connect with whether the genealogies describe messianic bloodlines? Secondly, you've got two-- not one but two-- different genealogies for Christ, neither of which fits the requirements for a messianic bloodline. This is in direct contradiction of the messianic prophecies. If you have a set of conditions, you can meet those conditions or not. This is a definite not. It is counter-evidence, hands down. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Your assertion is unsupported. And I think you will find, unsupportable. But please try.
quote: Niether Matthew nor Mark give a valid messianic bloodline. In the end, this is the killer and this conclusion has yet to be challenged. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: The prophecies are not only that the messiah be of David's line, but of David's line via his son Solomon. Luke's bloodline, typically argued to be that of Mary rather than Joseph, traces back to David via Nathan not Solomon. II Samuel 7:12-13. So we strike that one. Note: It really doesn't matter if it is Joseph's line or Mary's. Matthew give us a lineage that runs through a character named King Jeconiah. What's wrong with the King you ask? Well, God cursed him for one. Jeremiah 22:30 "Write this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days. For no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David and ruling anymore in Judah." ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: It plainly states "for none of his offspring will prosper,none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." That strikes me as pretty absolute. You can, of course, deny that it is a messianic passage. It is, however, nearly universally argued as such.
quote: Matthew made numerous errors so this is a bit of a moot point.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://web2.iadfw.net/capella/aguide/mattherr.htm No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.2think.org/hii/matt_err.shtml quote: Granted. However, from what I can tell, the author has it right. This isn't the only source I have read, but merely the most concise. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com [This message has been edited by John, 11-29-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I anxiously await your return. Take care. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Apologists choose Luke's genealogy as Mary's because there is an (percieved) exploitable word in Luke's text. I am not aware of anything similar in Matthew. The first question then is why do you believe that Matthew gives the genealogy through Mary? Without some means of counteracting what the Bible plainly states, the argument fails right here.
quote: I don't see that it matters. I have argued that both lines are invalid. Whose line is actually given is irrelevant.
quote: ummm.... no.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.teshuvah.com/articles/Does_Yeshua_qualify_as_the_Messiah.htm No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.branchofdavid.org/articles/either2.html No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.geocities.com/antimissionary/genealogy.html No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.teshuvah.com/articles/Does_Yeshua_qualify_as_the_Messiah.htm quote: The site you posted draws heavily upon extra biblical sources from Jewish tradition. This will cause some significant theological problems, which occured to me as I read it. One of the links I give confirms this and outlines some problems, so I won't repeat. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Oh yes. I remember that now. The argument rests upon the fact that the NT was originally written in aramaic. I can find no conclusive evidence for this, despite your first post. Secondly, the argument depends upon some questionable linguistic maneuvers. It isn't convincing. I'd like to see some harder evidence. And... The real issue, from my point a view, is that niether lineage is valid. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Sure, they may be surprised, but that is hardly grounds for taking it as a given. And I think the evidence against is pretty conclusive, anyway. And that makes any word-play based of the aramaic a moot point.
Christianseparatist.org ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Having some religious tolerance issues there judge? That post sure smells like distaste. But seriously, folks, that would be a ad hominem directed toward the author of the article. Granted, the man appears to be a white-supremist type, but the article looks to be a competent account. It tracks pretty well with what I've found elsewhere. That's right. I didn't stop looking when I found Mr. Herrel's site. His is a nicely written article though. I have in fact been looking into this for a week or so, off and on, because of this very thread. What I've found is that there is a lot going for the Greek-originals hypothesis and not much going for the aramaic-originals hypothesis. 1)The Peshitta is written is Syriac. Syriac is not the Aramaic of the 1st century. Syriac didn't pop up until the third or fourth century. 2)The Peshitta wasn't produced until 400 something. It can't therefore be the original. 3)A major language of the area at the time of Christ was Greek, and had been for some 300 years. (Christ apparently spoke aramaic, but then we are talking about the original language of the NT, not the language Christ spoke.)
No webpage found at provided URL: http://answering-islam.org/Bible/nt-languages.htmlNo webpage found at provided URL: http://www.geocities.com/queball23/Jesusspoke.html "One of the most surprising facts about these funerary inscriptions is that most of them are IN GREEK -- approximately 70 percent; about 12 percent are in Latin; and only 18 percent are in Hebrew or Aramaic. "These figures are even more instructive if we break them down between Palestine and the Diaspora. Naturally in Palestine we would expect more Hebrew and Aramaic and less Greek. This is true, but not to any great extent. Even in Palestine approximately TWO-THIRDS of these inscriptions are in GREEK. "APPARENTLY FOR A GREAT PART OF THE JEWISH POPULATION THE DAILY LANGUAGE WAS GREEK, EVEN IN PALESTINE. This is impressive testimony to the impact of Hellenistic culture on Jews in their mother country, to say nothing of the Diaspora. "In Jerusalem itself about 40 PERCENT of the Jewish inscriptions from the first century period (before 70 C.E.) ARE IN GREEK. We may assume that most Jewish Jerusalemites who saw the inscriptions in situ were able to read them" ("Jewish Funerary Inscriptions -- Most Are in Greek," Pieter W. Van Der Horst, BAR, Sept.-Oct.1992, p.48). 4)The NT quotes the Greek septuagint, thus establishing that the authors read Greek. 5) Mark 5:41 quotes Jesus speaking in aramaic and TRANSLATES those words into GREEK. This makes no sense if the text was written in aramaic. Why translate the aramaic to greek if your readers are already reading aramaic? -- my fav ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024